Some school officials were too anxious to control student dissent at walkouts

I have a nephew who attends Homewood-Flossmoor High School in the suburbs, and he was among the participants in that school’s attempt to participate in the national walkout of high school students desiring more stringent gun laws.

Not all high schools were as photogenic in their activity as these on Walkout day. Photo by Gregory Tejeda

Although to listen to his account of the school’s activity this week, it most definitely seems that some people have no clue of what a real “walkout” consists of.

SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICIALS did not make an effort to stop students from voicing their concerns; all students were told they could partake in such events.

But students at the south suburban high school were given various sites both inside the school building and outside on school property where they could gather to express themselves.

“Express themselves” meant conducting 17-minute moments of silence to pay tribute to the high school students who died in the Parkland, Fla., high school incident that had occurred one month earlier.

But as my nephew explained it, students had been told that while they were excused from class to participate, they were expected to do so in a respectful manner.

SOMETHING ALONG THE lines of go outside, do your moment of silence, then get back to class. Students were informed that disrespectful behavior WOULD be grounds for detention.

Downers Grove detention won't look like this

For what it’s worth, the number of students who got punished by the school for their behavior Wednesday morning wasn’t any higher than it would have been on any given school day. The school pulled off the illusion of protest without having any of the ugliness of students feeling compelled to speak out.

There certainly wasn’t any of the kind of activity of students marching through the streets of their surrounding neighborhood, yelling and screaming and demanding that our government officials take their heads out of their behinds and quit acting as those individuals in our society paranoid enough to feel the need to own an AK-47 or some other high-powered semi-automatic rifle are somehow expressing their “American-ness” in such actions.

It definitely isn’t the most controlling behavior I have heard of from school officials this week.

THAT COULD POSSIBLY go to the administrators of Downers Grove North and South high schools. There, students were told that participation in such activity would be regarded as a disruption of school and would be punishable by an hour’s detention.

The Chicago Tribune reported that some 3,900 students went to class, but another 1,100 engaged in a walkout. Perhaps we should complain about all the paper wasted due to all the detention slips written up – except that in today’s day and age, the students probably got detention e-mails informing them of their punishment.

It would be a crowded detention hall, except that school officials say they’re splitting the students up and having them serve their “time” either before, of after, school. Or even on Saturday.

As though they’re creating a real-life version of “The Breakfast Club.” Only no Molly Ringwald-like cutie hanging around, in all likelihood.

I NOTICED THE Chicago Public Schools administration put some organization into the marches that their students made so as to express themselves.

To the point where Illinois Attorney General candidate Pat Quinn felt compelled to show up at such a march – the one done by students at Benito Juarez High School.

At Benito Juarez, was it about Quinn?

Quinn even made a point of issuing a statement calling for, “common-sense solutions to end gun violence” – and a plea for donations, “if you can.” Although I suspect his real intent is less to pocket a few bucks, but to try to sway some of the Benito Juarez parents into casting votes for his political comeback dreams come Tuesday.

Making the student expression of political views nothing more than a political campaign stunt – just the type of activity that ought to warrant students rising up in protest against someone trying to steal their political voice.

  -30-

Rauner won't get pressured to sign proposed gun legislation into Ill. law

Gov. Bruce Rauner will be most remembered for his willingness to go two full years without a budget for Illinois government (causing many of the financial problems the state has today), but he’s also a governor who signed into law measures viewed as supportive of progressive views on abortion, immigration and transgender rights.

RAUNER: What will he do?

In each of those cases, Rauner put his signature of approval on measures the Democratic-majority General Assembly enacted with overwhelming approval – which means Rauner most likely felt pressured into signing off on issues he would have preferred to ignore.

AS THINGS TURNED out, Rauner refused to feel similar pressure in acting Tuesday on a measure the state Legislature approved to require retailers who sell firearms to be licensed by the state. Rauner dug out the "veto" pen in rejecting the idea -- saying he thought it excessive business regulation.

Rauner's rejection came one day after he was confronted with questions about his intentions on the bill, with the governor trying to repeat a stock answer that “a comprehensive solution is what I’m advocating for.”

He also talks of “work(ing) with our members of the General Assembly on a bipartisan basis to come up with real solutions on a bipartisan basis.” Apparently, it was clear enough for him to act.

IVES: Can't add gun control to rant list

He saw how signing off on the measure would have brought additional political heat onto himself. With just six days remaining until the primary Election Day in which he's seeking nomination for re-election, the last thing he wanted to give his ideologue critics (and they are an outspoken bunch) is another issue with which to smack him about.

RAUNER FOLLOWED UP his “none of your business”-type answers with a "drop dead" action to those people concerned about the growing access of firearms in our society -- particularly amongst some individuals who probably shouldn't have the ability to bear arms. That is what will appease the people whom Rauner wants to think of being his political backers; as in the ones who will view any efforts to enact new laws that restrict firearm access as being repulsive.

If Rauner had signed this newest bill into law, the kind of people openly campaigning against his re-election would have added “gun control” to the list of other sins they perceive the governor has committed against conservative-oriented people.

Will Rauner add to 'ideologue' reputation?

The last thing the governor wanted to do in this final week before Tuesday’s primary election is give GOP opponent Jeanne Ives yet another issue with which to bash him about.

Hence, we got the generic double-talk that says as little as possible, but which can be spun in interpretation as calling for a grand overall solution to the problem of too many firearms in our society – and way too many in the hands of people who probably shouldn’t be allowed to have them at all.

BUT THIS STILL is Illinois, the hard-core “blue” state of the Midwest (Indiana being the hard-core “red” state and many of the others being blue-leaning, but capable of being flipped in individual Elections day).

And with the mood of the nation making gun control a hot button issue, Rauner is now going to get a whack upside his head on a national scale.

I’m sure Rauner thinks he’s “damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.” Which is why his vagueness was all too understandable. He probably thinks by acting now, he can minimize the damage.

It can't be used against him in next week's primary, and perhaps he thinks that by the time the Nov. 6 general election comes around, it will be a long-forgotten issue. Perhaps he thinks it will be like all the people who ranted about Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and the "pop tax" who now don't say much about it.

NOT THAT IT will succeed. For anything related to firearms or violence is going to get an intense amount of attention. It is, after all, the political “flavor of the month.”

Why else would high school students across the nation, including in Chicago, be planning a walkout from class Wednesday as a way of urging political people to take action on this issue -- it has been one month since the Florida school incident that triggered much of the recent rhetoric.

How will student outpour influence firearms debate?

And yes, I find it humorous to read the line in a Chicago Tribune report that says school officials are cooperating with organizers to plan walkouts that are “nonpolitical.”

I’m not sure how that’s possible. Too many people of both sides will want to politicize what happens Wednesday, along with Rauner's veto. I'm sure the Democratic majority of the Legislature will take pride in overriding Rauner later this year, probably as much joy as many of the students who participate Wednesday will be doing so just for the joy of cutting class!

  -30-